Bulat Ziganshin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Hello Thomas, | | Friday, August 18, 2006, 7:57:13 AM, you wrote: | | >> There is a major difference though, in C++ (or java, or sather, or c#, | >> etc..) the dictionary is always attached to the value, the actual class | >> data type you pass around. in haskell, the dictionary is passed | >> separately and the appropriae one is infered by the type system. C++ | >> doesn't infer, it just assumes everything will be carying around its | >> dictionary with it. | | > C++ programmers deal with this using a number of techniques, mostly | > involving templates. | | Haskell type classes are closer to templates/generics than to classes | itself
I believe Haskell type classes are closer to *parameterized abstract classes* than to classes. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
